The Duplex double twin home question

The type of architecture that I would like to discuss today involves the duplex. However the term duplex may not entirely describe the type of Buffalo architecture I am interested in. There is some level of discrepancy between what constitutes the duplex. For instance I live in what I considered to be a duplex however this appears to be a made up term because I could not find an appropriate listing in the architecture of Buffalo website. The closest that I could find concerns doubles. Even these doubles are not quite like the house i live in. The majority of doubles like those found on Hertel Avenue are upper and lower doubles. These type of buildings do seem to fit into the standard definition of the double, at least according to the standard of upper and lower levels comprising two separate living situations.

However this is different from the housing wherein the occupants live side by side. upon further investigation it appears as though a popular name for this type of house is a "twin home". In the neighborhood that I live there are these "twin homes" or "duplexes" if you will for blocks upon blocks. What is this an indication of? Well the website when it talks about the "industrial vernacular style" seems to point towards a definition that likens the use of these types of housing situations to working class and lower rent neighborhoods. In some ways this can be true, especially in the neighborhood that I live in. But I still find this unusual, judging from this picture of a house which is located 2 blocks from where I am, one would not, I don't think, classify this as a lower standard of living. Maybe it's just the people and places I associate with. Maybe because it looks better than my house.
When you look at something like the duplex above and this one from North Buffalo around the Colvin area

you can definitely see two distinct structures. However I, as not an architect, would see both of these as a duplex. This is how wikipedia defines duplex, "a dwelling having apartments with separate entrances for two families. This includes two-story houses having a complete apartment on each floor and also side-by-side apartments on a single lot that share a common wall.^[1] By contrast, a building comprising two attached units on two distinct properties is typically considered semi-detached or twin homes but may also be referred to as a duplex".

I believe a major part of the difference between the double of the city and the "twin house" is the amount of space available. There is a good deal less space available within city limits but once one gets to the suburbs like Amherst the amount of space increases. People no longer have to live on top of or under each other. Having lived in both types of houses I prefer 'twin homes" to doubles.  But why not have rows of single family houses in these  neighborhoods? Well the answer is one of economics. The areas of suburbs, at least in my region of Amherst, are designed for college students, and similar lower income families. However one might not think that by taking the houses in individually.

The other thing that is interesting about the "twin homes" in this neighborhood is the amount of diversity among these houses which do look quite similar at first glance. Take for instance the picture of the home with the columns. These look to me like something that wants to attempt a Greek Revival motif. The picture below it is directly across the street yet presents a very different style. Although to me the triangular arched doorway is also indicative of the Greek fashion, i.e. the Parthenon.

But then you see other houses which are completely plain, all of the ornamentals have been stripped even though one can see a facade on the front of the house. This house looks more like a tenement row house than any of the others. It feels as though the feel of the houses in this particular area were designed as row houses but later split off because of the larger amount of space involved.

Euro-American vacation tours

Ahhhhh Europe. From the time that I was much younger than I am now I have wanted to go to Europe. There is in my mind, as well as in the minds of the majority of Americans, a certain perspective on Europe and the things that one would like to see there. The pervasive feeling that is present here seems to be one of pop culture. It is the 'in' thing to do when you go to Europe to see Big Ben, the Eiffel Tower, the Leaning Tower of Pisa...the list can go on and on.

As a matter of fact one only needs to type in a search for European attractions and they will find these lists and travel guides already made for you. As an interesting question, are these guides made by Europeans or Americans? One has to wonder if these places that hold the captivation of the American public mean the same thing to those who live there. For instance if someone from Europe were to visit me, I would naturally take them to Niagara Falls, and they, if they are any indication of the majority of people have heard of it. However there are obviously other places that I would take them as well i.e. Duff's or even Pearl St. Brewery. Now they probably have not heard of these places (maybe), but they are well known to most who reside in the Buffalo region. Therefore it almost feels as though the importance of these places of great tourist importance are subject to a great deal of relativity. I have a feeling the same things happen in Europe and that those who take the 'standard package tour' might miss much if they choose to stay on the 'beaten path'. Having said this there truly is a vast difference between the type of attractions that are directed towards Europeans and those which are directed towards Americans.

The difference is that we are directed towards BUILDINGS. At least as far as I can tell, the vast majority of attractions which are directly advertised are cathedrals, castles, ancient ruins, monuments. Places that are old. I believe that this is what it breaks down to. We are a young culture, even though each of us comes from a much older culture historically speaking. The places of attraction that one is given as suggestion upon visiting Europe are those that portray the age of European cities and structures as contrasting the veritable newness of our own.

Now if we consider that the attractions in Europe are attractions because of their age (obviously there are other factors, not all old things are pleasant to look at) then to what does one ascribe the wonders of America? Although there are clearly suggestions to Europeans to visit the cities of the United States, the predominant amount of literature devoted to touring America focuses upon its landscapes. Even more specifically a great emphasis is placed upon its national parks, battlegrounds, and scenic locations. So in Europe, modern-day Americans, not unlike those of the 19th century,  are encouraged to take in the architecture and monumental buildings. However those traveling here from Europe are greatly encouraged to visit National Parks, and areas of 'wilderness'. It feels as though not much has changed from colonial times in that respect.

Skylines

Many modern cities tend to look the same these days. that isn't to say that all cities have to exact same features because there are obvious landmarks that are present in some cities that are not present in others. Consider Seattle's Space Needle or the Gateway Arch in Missouri. However there are differences in the way that European cities look in comparison to American ones.

The Skyline of Amsterdam
One of the most predominant differences that can be seen at first glance is that European cities appear to have fewer numbers of skyscrapers and other buildings that stand out from the skyline. Take for example this skyline of Amsterdam as compared to the skyline of New York City. The skyline of Amsterdam is dominated by much lower and more compacted buildings. The density of European cities is greater than that of American cities. That is not an indication of population but of the proximity of buildings. this has a lot to do with the age of the cities in question. American cities tend to have many more higher buildings but they are of an entirely different feeling from those in Europe.

Now then consider the appearance of a city like Munich, Germany as compared to New York City. The differences are aesthetic as well as architectural. The similar color scheme and construction style that can be seen on many of the buildings is indicative of a European city. It is very rare that you will see such similarities in an American city. The cities in Europe look as though they were planned at more or less the same time, whereas the American city looks like something that just got thrown together as money for various building projects was obtained, which is pretty much how it did happen or at least in terms of the contemporary look of cities. Munich is not the only place you can see this type of planning. Consider also the cities of Italy, or Denmark where cities retain the Old World charm which is absent in America.

This picture is of Toledo, Spain. Notice again the lack of "superstructures" as well as the closeness of the buildings. Also the aesthetic quality of the city is striking. The roofs all appear to be made of the same sorts of materials, if not the same color. The colors of the buildings themselves are the same if not similar. These cities are in direct contrast to a city like Chicago where it seems that a great portion of the buildings are skyscrapers.

A large part of me puts the differences in cities from America to Europe in terms of religion. The one thing you can clearly distinguish in the pictures of the European cities is the church. It looks as though the majority of the town sprang up around the church/cathedral, you can see the spires above everything else. However when you look at the skyline of Chicago its "steeples" are antennae not to mention the vast amounts of building which are way over the usual 4 to 7 story pattern one sees in the European city.

Irish Community

Upon inspection of Buffalo's numerous communities one is often overwhelmed at the amount of culture they can find and the specificity of that culture that shows up in tiny pockets throughout the city. This is a fairly vague statement as I am sure that you can find these pockets anywhere you look, in pretty much every city. Not being from Buffalo originally however but having lived here for the last 5 years, I am filled with questions regarding the ethnic and cultural backgrounds of those who built the structures that we now deem 'historical'. One of the more interesting places to me in this regard is the First Ward District of South Buffalo. Perhaps it is my Irish heritage that causes this connection but it is also something else. Upon inspection of the First Ward in the present time one can undoubtedly see the general disrepair that has befallen it, along with much of this once majestic city, but more importantly one can definitely see that it is was and is still an Irish neighborhood.  
Susan Hardwick in her article on ethnicity in landscape states that ""ethnic landscape" refers to the imprints on the land left by people who share a common identity linked to a common place of origin" (231) So it is not as though the Irish who settled in the First Ward built all of their structures in the shape of a shamrock or anything quite so gaudy but rather that we can see commonalities throughout the ways that their buildings are made and the types of structures they choose to make.

The First Ward, in this zoning map from 1855-1890 shows many different neighborhoods each with their own distinctive ethnic background. The First Ward is waterside and it is said that many of the Irish settlers that came there did so after having completed their work on the Erie Canal. Typically today many people do still conceive of communities as being based around members of the same ethnic group living within the same few block radius. However this was much more prevalent during the the industrialization of the country and this is especially true in the major urban areas.

So what distinguishes the areas of Irish settlement from that of others? Well...

For one thing the tavern or pub, while not a primarily Irish idea or structure is somehow one of the most prevalent things that comes to mind when considering what an Irish neighborhood looks like. Somehow a neighborhood that does not have a pub in it cannot possibly be seen as Irish. Buffalo's First Ward is no different than this. This is just as true in the mid 1800's as it is today, if not more-so.

These photos show the same building in obviously very different states of existence. The first picture is from approximately 1850 when it was still a hotel, called interestingly enough, the German Hotel. The second is from much more recently when in 2008 its roof was lost in heavy winds. It has since been demolished.
It should be no surprise that the pub is the enduring element of Irish heritage that one thinks of whenever Irish culture is mentioned. Partly because yes, Irish people do drink...alot... but also because upon constructing their new world as a reflection of the one they left behind they would have been completely remiss in not making the pub, which was to be the center of communal activities. Lets compare the older picture of the building above, McBrides or even Blackthorn's, with this picture of a Dublin hostel.

The similarities of the building are startling. Notice the four windows on the upper floors and the two on the mid floors. Also the shapes of the buildings are the same as well. While the building from Dublin does look decidedly more modern one has to wonder at whether or not this is because of a present-day face-lift or if it is just the lighting. However the Hardwick article does say something interesting about this, " the physical and social isolation of the Scots-Irish and other immigration groups in the United States in certain parts of the country encouraged the creation and retention of unique landscape features."

Pay Phone Landscape

Ahhhh the payphone. Nowadays when my car is filled with bees I can use my cell phone to call someone to get me out of the potentially harmful situation. However this was obviously not always the case. In 1960 Bell Systems installed its 1 millionth pay phone. Pay phones could be found everywhere in a plethora of styles and convenient settings. There were drive up pay phones, payphones at almost every grocery store, community center, and gathering place. There were even some payphones set up in the desert. See the Mojave Pay Phone. But these days if I am stuck without a cell phone then chances are I will be unable to find a payphone, or at the very least a working pay phone. The cultural and physical landscape was altered by the pay phone. It changed the way business around the world was done and prior to outdoor phone booths the pay phone was one of the focal points of most small and large towns. Airport terminals, subways, and bus depots were absolutely filled with phone banks and people clamoring to use them. The easiest place to see a payphone in this day and age might be at your local prison, but even these only accept outgoing collect calls.

I suppose I could always wait for whichever awesome person rides this mobile pay phone bike but lets face it. Who has that much time to spare when your car is inexplicably filled with bees?
The payphone had a fairly long and interesting history. As the story goes William Gray was frantically searching around his town for a phone so he could make a call to his sick and possibly dying wife. He was finally able to convince the owner of a local store to let him use his phone. After this Gray along with an inventor friend came up with a way to ensure that anyone in need would be able to find a phone. and over 100 years later payphones are still in existence. Although that existence is quickly dwindling. My first gut reaction to this loss of the payphone is a simple "who cares" attitude. But this reaction is unfounded and leaves out alot of possibilities. There are alot of people who still depend on the payphone to make and receive calls, to make appointments, and as an alternative to overly expensive cellphone charges. Not to mention that homeless people most certainly make use of payphones if they can.

The landscape of America was at one time changed by the addition of at one point over 2.5 million payphones and booths. Even National Parks were inundated with the technology. In one park reportedly moose kept knocking into the glass booths because they thought the reflections were other moose threatening their territory. In the same way that the addition affected the landscape, with wires and clearings made for phones, so too does their elimination. www.payphoneproject.com documents the loss of these pieces of American history and describes the changes in the environments around which they were situated. Generally all that is left in the place of an uprooted phone booth is 4 rods of twisted metal or if the phone still remains it is typically in defunct condition.

The other thing to consider when dealing with the history of payphones when dealing in terms of landscape is the amount of land that must have been cleared in order to make way for the lines to be put in. It seems like an important side note to me. To think that all of that clearing is just to make way for all of these systems to be put in a landfill feels like an enormous waste of money and energy.
 

second history

The term "Second History" leads me to feel several different things, especially since my move to buffalo almost 5 years ago.  The first thing i think is the inherent inability of the term to encompass the true feeling that one receives upon looking at the years of cultural facade upon the streets of the city and its neighboring suburbs. Truly these places have undergone a change in history that far outreaches a second, third, or even fourth history. Obviously a feeling like this would be much more predominant in the European countryside, where it seems things don't change for centuries, but the feeling is somehow much more eerie in the context of the American Landscape. I am constantly reminded that the objects, buildings, centers of commerce of America were once wholly and completely different. The change that occurs can happen in matters of decades, sometimes even only one. The other thing that strikes me is that although everywhere we look we can see a vast kaleidoscopic mixture of old and new edifices one often forgets that inside each of these buildings a different story is to be told, either by those that built it, lived there, or even those that still bear witness as to what it was like in the 'good ol days". Having been confined to the internet for the last week or so, vs. actually being able to go into the real world, i came across numerous images and stories of the way that Buffalo and its surviving neighborhoods used to be. The stories tell a rather sad and depressing tale, one which is not distinctly Buffalonian in context but seems these days to be a part of an American tale. The once burgeoning storefronts with bright glittering marquees and the glitz and glamor of hope seem to have left Buffalo and most major cities of the Rust Belt behind. If one thinks it disheartening to think back upon the changes of say, a 20 year period, then one can only imagine being able to look back 50 years or more. One story that was attached to some images I found was that of a haberdasher in East Buffalo who started his business 20 years ago in what was a promising neighborhood. Recently he was woken up to the cops telling him they had arrested a man with an uzi on his front steps. I wonder if the man was simply admiring the brick facade or investigating the post war building structure. Probably not. For more information on this see http://buffalostoryproject.com/2010/04/17/rise-and-ruin/. However I digress, I guess the real questions that I have are ones that concern American existence and the structures we build. Is our declining Urban structure a symptom of a throwaway society, a "screw it, we'll just build and new one" mentality? In contrast to Europe where castles and cities are centuries old, are we incapable of creating things that last more than a 75 year time-span, or even more so are we able to preserve them as links to the past?